1. Field of Invention
The present invention relates to an adjustable occupant propelled mobility apparatus that can be utilized in the therapy of children with disabilities and children recuperating from injury or surgery while providing orthopedic therapy in a variety of body positions.
2. Description of the Related Prior Art
There are several forms of prior art that are known to the applicant. The prior art includes several types of occupant propelled multi-wheeled vehicles and other medical devices that are currently manufactured products or U.S. Patents. Many of these products and U.S. Patents have the limitation of being generally designed as a mode of transportation.
Regarding the manufactured products, there are a number of physical therapy and mobility products for children currently available. These products are generally known as:
1. Wheelchairs, which are for transportation, where the occupant is placed in a seated position. PA0 2. Mobility carts, a small wheelchair-like product, where the occupant is placed in a seated position. PA0 3. Scooter boards, scooters or caster carts, which are dolly like devices that generally incorporate a flat piece of plywood with swivel casters, one mounted at each corner, where the occupant is placed lying face down with the front of their body in contact with the device. PA0 4. Prone standers or positioners, which generally incorporate a flat piece of plywood, to act as a body support board, mounted onto a metal or wood frame stand, in which the occupant is placed and secured with their stomach and the front of their legs in contact with the plywood, and PA0 5. Supine boards, which generally incorporate a flat piece of plywood, to act as a body support board, mounted onto a metal or wood frame stand, in which the occupant is placed and secured with their back, and the back of their legs in contact with the plywood.
The limitations and disadvantages of these manufactured products are that adjustability for specific muscle group physical therapy and exercise is not incorporated into their design. Relating to the wheelchairs, mobility carts, and scooter boards, the child is either placed into a seated position, where the back support structure remains at a fixed angle, or the child is placed in a horizontal prone position. This creates a condition where one group of muscles and joints provides the force for propulsion, and selecting concentration to a specific musculoskeletal group through adjustability is not available. Another disadvantage of these types of devices is that the occupant only has the option of being placed and secured onto the device in one body position, either seated in the wheelchair and mobility cart, or lying flat on the scooter board since the body support board is rigid. The fixed angle of the back support structure on the wheelchair and mobility cart, and non-adjustable rigidity of the scooter board, does not allow flexing the spine, thereby preventing movement of the spine through a range of motion of flexion and extension.
Although the wheelchair and mobility cart provide increased mobility, the inherent design places the occupant in a seated position, thereby increasing muscle atrophy and becoming prone to lower internal organ failure. It has been shown that children with disabilities benefit from the use of wheelchairs, mobility carts, scooter boards, prone devices and supine devices, and that being placed in the prone position benefits children who need to develop head, shoulder, and trunk extension. Although the prior art can provide these options, the patient requires purchasing separate products, instead of having the availability of one piece of medical apparatus to meet all of these needs.
In the manufactured products, the wheels are secured at fixed locations, preventing adjustment to the child's special needs. The fixed wheel locations also prevent adjustment to the wheelbase dimensions of these products, which places limits on the maneuverability. The fixed wheel locations also prevent a change in the elevation of the wheels with respect to the ground surface, which forces all of the wheels to have an even distribution of the load into the ground surface simultaneously. Since all of the wheels contact the ground surface simultaneously, the wheels are arranged to carry a balanced weight of the occupant and vehicle.
The existing manufactured products of wheelchair, mobility cart, and scooter board devices lack an adjustable orthopedic brace system and therefore do not have the ability to provide orthopedic therapy. The lack of a bracing system through adjustable orthopedic braces prevents these existing products from being utilized for providing general body support. The lack of orthopedic braces does not allow for the prevention and/or correction of long bone deformation or torsional deformities from birth defects or other conditions.
Other types of existing manufactured products that are available are known as prone standers, prone positioners, and supine boards, which generally incorporate a flat piece of plywood, to act as a body support board, mounted onto a metal or wood frame stand. In the prone devices, the occupant is secured into this device with their stomach and the front of their legs in contact with the flat plywood, and then secured into place with straps or braces. In the supine devices, the occupant would be placed with their back and the back of their legs in contact with the plywood, and then secured with straps and braces. The disadvantages of these types of prone and supine devices are that the occupant only has the option of being placed and secured onto the device in one body position since the body support board is rigid and that this non-adjustable rigidity does not allow flexing the spine into a seated position, thereby preventing movement of the spine through a range of motion of flexion and extension.
Through research of the prior art, it does not appear that the supine board device is available for occupant propulsion. Some of these supine devices are designed to remain stationary with respect to the ground surface and are not mobile. Other supine devices have swivel casters but no available means for the occupant to propel the device. Propulsion for mobility must come from second party intervention.
Regarding the prone devices, some are designed to remain stationary with respect to the ground surface and are not mobile. Other prone devices have swivel casters but no available means for the occupant to propel the device. Propulsion for mobility must come from second party intervention. Several versions of prone standers are available with swivel casters and wheelchair type traction wheels and the occupant can propel themselves.
With the exception of the prone devices that have wheelchair wheels, the occupant cannot propel themselves and therefore cannot accomplish the benefits of physical therapy and exercise through self propulsion and does not gain the psychological benefits of independent self mobility. In these devices the wheels are also secured in fixed locations.
The U.S. Patents disclose several types of vehicles that appear to be mainly for transportation purposes and are generally lacking with regard to therapeutic value and exercise function. Many of the limitations and disadvantages that have been discussed previously are also applicable to the cited U.S. Patents. Further discussion of the disclosed patents follows:
U.S. Pat. No. 2,869,686 to Glanz (1959) discloses a hand operated toy car that has fixed wheel locations in which all wheels contact ground surface simultaneously as well as a back support that remains at a fixed angle. With this wheel configuration there is a constant wheelbase dimensions that cannot be adjusted.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,620,714 to Davis (1986) discloses an ambulatory wheelstand that has fixed wheel locations in which all wheels contact ground surface simultaneously. The wheelstand does show an adjustable body support that can move the occupant in a range of angles between vertical and horizontal. When placed in this body support, the occupant remains in a flat prone position that does not allow movement of the spine through a range of motion of flexion and extension. Although the occupant can be moved to a horizontal prone position, the occupant cannot propel themselves to simulate the crawling action exercise and coordination obtained by a normal infant utilizing arm and leg propulsion on the ground surface.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,997,200 to Earls (1991) discloses a combination wheelchair-gurney apparatus that has fixed wheel locations in which all wheels contact the ground surface simultaneously. The wheelchair-gurney has a back support plate that moves to the reclining position, but it is not adjustable throughout the range of motion. The back support plate can only remain in the full vertical or full horizontal position.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,020,816 to Mulholland (1991) discloses an adjustable frame wheelchair. The wheelchair has four load bearing wheels that simultaneously contact the ground surface. Adjustable traction wheel positions are attainable, but if the traction wheels are moved too far forward, the center of gravity of the wheelchair and occupant would shift and the wheelchair would tip backward. The adjustable traction wheel capability does not appear to be for physical therapy and localized muscle group exercise. In addition, the device has a back support that remains at a fixed angle.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,242,180 to Bergeron (1993) discloses a prone stander. The weight of the occupant is distributed through the traction wheels and the single rear caster, but the fixed locations of the wheels does not allow adjustment of the wheelbase. The front caster does not contact the ground simultaneously with the other three wheels. Due to the inherent center of gravity of the device, the weight remains rearward and the front caster is never in contact the ground surface, according to Bergeron Patent Column 6, Lines 2 through 8.
Further limitations and disadvantages of the prior art will become apparent throughout the patent application presented.